“Tennessee’s electric cooperatives believe that low rates and reliable power must be a part of our clean energy future,” said David Callis, executive vice president and general manager of the Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association. “Unfortunately, the EPA didn’t consider the real-world impact this latest proposal will have on the cost and reliability of energy for families and businesses. That’s why thousands of Tennesseans told the EPA they couldn’t afford another all-pain-for-no-gain government regulation. It’s possible to balance affordability and environmental stewardship, but not under these latest rules.”

Comments were collected online at takeactionTN.com and from cards distributed by local electric cooperatives. These comments are also being submitted to the Tennessee Valley Authority as a part of TVA’s Integrated Resource Planning process that determines how the agency will generate energy in the future.

These 14,000 comments were part of a nation-wide effort by electric cooperatives that collectively submitted more than 1.1 million comments to the EPA opposing new regulations for new and existing power plants.

You can learn more about the impact of these regulations and get involved at tnelectric.org/takeaction.

]]>http://www.tnelectric.org/2014/12/01/14000-comments-to-the-epa/feed/0One million commentshttp://www.tnelectric.org/2014/10/09/one-million-comments/
http://www.tnelectric.org/2014/10/09/one-million-comments/#commentsThu, 09 Oct 2014 19:13:28 +0000Trent Scotthttp://www.tnelectric.org/?p=3507America’s electric cooperatives have collected one million comments in opposition to the EPA’s proposed rule targeting existing power plants. This milestone boosts our relevance in the nation’s capital and sends a powerful message to EPA officials.

Our drive to one million has not been a simple task, and it would not have been possible without the support of co-op members.

“This has been a concentrated effort to protect our members from expensive and ineffective government regulations,” says David Callis, executive vice president and general manager of the Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association. “I thank everyone who has helped us take a stand for affordable and reliable energy.”

While reaching this milestone is cause for celebration, now is not the time to take a break. There’s still more time to grow the number of comments that we’ll send on this proposal. Because the EPA recently extended the comment deadline to December 1, there’s now an additional 45 days for all of us to encourage more people to make their voices heard.

]]>http://www.tnelectric.org/2014/10/09/one-million-comments/feed/0EPA grants comment extensionhttp://www.tnelectric.org/2014/09/16/epa-grants-comment-extension/
http://www.tnelectric.org/2014/09/16/epa-grants-comment-extension/#commentsTue, 16 Sep 2014 19:15:57 +0000Trent Scotthttp://www.tnelectric.org/?p=3460The EPA announced on Tuesday that it will grant a 45 day extension to the comment period for its climate rule on existing power plants.

The announcement of a new Dec. 1 deadline comes after more than half of the Senate asked the EPA to extend the comment period for another 60 days. Both Sens. Alexander and Corker signed the letter sent to EPA administrator Gina McCarthy last week.

“The EPA’s proposed regulation will have significant impacts on the affordability and reliability of power and poses a threat to American jobs and the economy,” says David Callis, executive vice president and general manager of the Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association. “We applaud the EPA’s decision to extend the comment period, we thank Senators Alexander and Corker for their support on this issue, and we encourage all Tennesseans to visit takeactionTN.com to send your own message to the EPA.”

While there are usually two sides to every story, quite often there are even more. That makes decision-making difficult, whether it’s parenting, voting or solving complex business decisions. If you’ve ever separated quarreling siblings, you know it’s no simple task discovering who instigated the fight. You listen to both parties, check the facts and dispense justice — or something close to it.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently introduced its Clean Power Plan, which would essentially restructure the way electricity is generated — local decisions would be made in Washington, D.C. As the EPA unveiled the proposed rule, it also quoted statistics stating that the cost of electricity would be lower in 2030 if the rule were adopted.

If you only consider the information the EPA provided, you wouldn’t really understand why anyone would oppose a plan that purports to lower your electric bill and fight climate change.

That is unless, of course, you looked at another side of the issue.

Everyone wants clean air; that should go without saying. Over the past decades, electric cooperatives across the nation have invested billions of dollars in emissions technologies and renewable energy sources. We’ve also led the way in energy-efficiency efforts; what other industry pays you to use less of its product?

Closer to home, the Tennessee Valley Authority closed several aging coal plants, switched fuels to natural gas whenever possible and continued to build carbon-emission-free nuclear generation. All of these measures have been cost-effective, systematic and done without federal mandates. (TVA is a federal agency, but operating decisions are made locally.)

The EPA’s rule essentially eliminates coal as a generation source. To the EPA and proponents of the rule, that’s great. Yet, there is another side to the “war on coal.”

At a recent EPA hearing in Denver, Moffat County (Colorado) Commissioner John Kinkaid shared the impact coal has on his county. He began by discussing the natural beauty of his county and the tourism and recreational options available.

And then he discussed the financial impact of the EPA rule. The coal mines and power plants are the largest taxpayers in the county, providing an annual financial impact of more than $428 million to the local economy. This comes from the very same coal-fired plant that co-exists with the residents and the mountains.

Residents of the county don’t want it closed. They don’t want local residents to lose good jobs. They don’t want their school systems to struggle for funding. They want to control their destiny, making the decisions that impact their future.

Opposition to EPA’s Clean Power Plan doesn’t mean that we only support coal, and it certainly doesn’t mean that we oppose clean air. However, the plan’s impact on the U.S. economy is far too great without making any significant impact on reducing global carbon emissions.

Moffat County is only one of many areas impacted by the plan. Tens of thousands of families could see their lives upended for a rule that, on its face, looks like a good idea.

As we’ve mentioned, the EPA is taking comments on the Clean Power Plan proposed rule until Thursday, Oct. 16. EPA officials asked for comments, so let’s give them comments. Go to takeactionTN.com and let your voice be heard.

Despite a few high-profile scandals, I like to believe that most corporations abide by the law. Some do so because it’s the right thing to do. Others do so because of existing regulations and laws.

Along those lines, how do electric utilities respond when regulatory bodies force operational changes? If federal energy policy enacts changes that alter your strategy, sound business practice demands that you comply. Obeying the law ensures continued operation; doing the opposite invites fines, failure or possibly even incarceration.

It’s not an unusual happening in the energy industry. Our government is empowered to ensure that the economy functions well, and sound energy policy keeps the engine of industry running. Over the years, the federal government has taken action in a variety of ways: establishing and maintaining a Strategic Petroleum Reserve, restricting exports of fuels that are in short supply and even mandating that certain fuel sources be avoided.

That last point is a troubling one. Successful businesses plan for the future, doing their best to anticipate changing economic and market conditions. Most businesses plan strategically for the next two to three years; others take longer looks, three to five years and beyond, depending on their forecasting ability. In the electric utility business, routine planning for us means that we plan 20 to 30 years into the future.

The electric utility business is a very capital-intensive business. That simply means it costs a lot of money to build large electric generating plants and transformers and string wire. When you are constructing and maintaining a costly infrastructure, it requires meticulous long-term planning.

That’s particularly true for utilities such as the Tennessee Valley Authority that build facilities that generate electricity. In planning for the needs of our state and the surrounding area, TVA is currently in the midst of doing just that. Its Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) will be completed later this year.

Exploring the capital-intensive nature of our business, if a utility in, say, 1974, was planning for a 30-year future, one decision is what fuel to use. It needs to be a source that is abundantly available. The utility would make the best economic choice, taking into consideration the cost of the fuel, pollution standards and safety concerns.

What if one of those sources was taken off the table by regulators?

Around 1974, the 94th Congress passed S. 622, better known as the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. The law was signed by President Gerald Ford on Dec. 22, 1975. The official summary of the act reads: “Extends through June 30, 1977, the authority of the Administrator of the Federal Energy Administration under the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act to issue orders prohibiting power plants and major fuel burning installations from using natural gas or petroleum products as fuel if they had been capable on June 22, 1974, of burning coal.” (emphasis mine)

The message delivered in 1975 was that burning natural gas is bad and burning coal is good. That’s a bit different than what we’re facing in 2014.

There were sound reasons for the decisions made in 1975, yet those decisions had consequences. We have a significant amount of coal-fired generation in this country that will be costly and difficult to replace.

Congressional action typically involves a thorough, deliberative process when setting energy policy. However, policy dictated by an agency without that process is subject to far less scrutiny.

As we’ve told you before, you have an opportunity to let your voice be heard. The Environmental Protection Agency is taking comments on its proposed Clean Power Plan until Oct. 16. TVA continues to invite comments on its IRP until Nov. 25.

Go to takeactionTN.com today and send a message. We need sensible solutions that provide for affordable and reliable power.

Over the past year, you may have read in these pages about your local electric cooperative’s concerns about government regulations and how those regulations might affect electricity generation at new power plants that might need to be built to keep our homes cool and power our modern economy. Many of you have expressed your agreement or disagreement with my words — sometimes in colorful language — and I am appreciative of the feedback you have provided me.

Regardless of where we all may fall on the political spectrum, I think we can agree that our modern society demands a constant supply of reliable and affordable electric energy. Our world simply wouldn’t be the same without it. And the fine folks at your local co-op, for whom I work, are where “the rubber meets the road” on these important issues. It is serious and complex work.

In what is probably the most significant regulation ever proposed by an agency of the United States government, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently released a proposed rule that would limit the emissions of carbon dioxide from existing, rather than new, power plants all across America. These rules are far-reaching and unique. And since you own your co-op, you will be impacted in some way.

What the rule does

The Obama administration had previously proposed a national goal of reducing carbon emissions by 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. Instead of an across-the-board reduction, however, the proposed rule sets state-specific goals and creates guidelines to be used in making proposed methods to meet those goals. After approval of the rule, state governments will be required to develop detailed implementation plans that will determine what specific actions are taken to achieve the required reductions in carbon emissions. EPA will have the ability to approve or disapprove those plans.

There are significant differences in the requirements placed upon the states. Washington state, for instance, will be required to reduce its carbon emission rate by 76 percent while North Dakota will only be required to reduce its rate by 11 percent. Tennessee’s required reduction will be 39 percent, ranking 13th on the list of most impacted states. The accompanying chart shows the three most- and least-affected states as well as the required reductions for Tennessee and our neighboring states. It is unclear how states will be able to develop plans when a particular power plant serves customers in several states or is owned by the federal government instead of private company, as is the case for every power plant here in Tennessee.

How the rule works

Because of the nature of the rule, the nuts and bolts of what must be done to achieve the goals set by EPA won’t be clear for some time — possibly as far out as 2016. EPA set the state-by-state goals by developing a “best system of emission reductions,” and there are thousands of pages of technical details that accompany the rule and detail how these goals were set. At the time this article was authored, those details are still being evaluated, page by page. States will have several years to submit their plans to EPA for approval, and that is the point in time when the tough decisions will have to be made.

We do know, however, that this rule will force a significant number of coal-fired power plants to shut down or convert to using natural gas as fuel. We know that the rule encourages states or groups of states to implement a cap-and-trade model of carbon emission allocations. We know that in order to comply, actions will be required that are “outside the fence” of a power plant — actions like requiring utilities to implement energy-efficiency or demand-management programs. We also know that new nuclear generation will help states achieve their goals, as nuclear power does not emit any carbon into the atmosphere.

What can I do?

While it will be many years before the full scope of this plan could be implemented, there is short window of time in which the EPA will be actively soliciting comments from the public about the proposed rule. Starting with the day the rule is published in the Federal Register, there will be a 120-day comment period. As you become more educated about this rule, make your voice heard by visiting takeactionTN.com and submitting a comment to the EPA about your thoughts.

NASHVILLE – Tennessee’s electric cooperatives express concern following the release of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed guidelines that will limit emissions from thousands of existing power plants, including 11 coal plants operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority.

“Estimates indicate that Tennessee will be among the hardest hit by the state requirements, calling for a 38 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030,” says David Callis, executive vice president and general manager of the Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association. “These regulations will hurt Tennessee families, and we are just beginning to understand how severe the impacts will be.”

Tennessee has already taken significant steps to improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions. “The average monthly residential energy use in Tennessee has fallen 16 percent since 2010, and TVA has reduced its carbon emissions by 30 percent since 2005,” says Callis.

“It is important that we make our voices heard. Affordable energy and a strong Tennessee economy depend on an all-of-the-above approach to energy generation.”

The EPA will hold a 120-day public comment period, and you can submit your comments to the EPA by visiting takeactionTN.com.

“The economic challenges faced by many cooperative members make it critical that EPA regulatory programs be cost effective and provide environmental benefits that exceed the implementation and compliance costs,” says Callis.

The Tennessee Electric Cooperative Association is a trade group representing the interests of Tennessee’s 23 electric distribution cooperatives and the 1.1 million rural and suburban consumers they serve. The association publishes The Tennessee Magazine and provides legislative and support services to Tennessee’s electric cooperatives. Learn more at tnelectric.org.

]]>http://www.tnelectric.org/2014/06/02/tennessee-among-states-hardest-hit-by-epa-regulations/feed/2Taking the co-op message to DChttp://www.tnelectric.org/2014/05/09/taking-the-co-op-message-to-dc/
http://www.tnelectric.org/2014/05/09/taking-the-co-op-message-to-dc/#commentsFri, 09 May 2014 18:00:21 +0000Trent Scotthttp://www.tnelectric.org/?p=3235More than 100 Tennesseans joined more than 2,500 co-op leaders from across the nation to participate in the NRECA Legislative Conference on May 4-6 in Washington, D.C. The conference provided CEOs, directors and co-op staffers with insights from Washington insiders and briefings from NRECA lobbyists to use during meetings with lawmakers.

“People will know that Co-op Nation is here,” NRECA CEO Jo Ann Emerson said at the first conference session May 5 at the Hyatt Regency Washington on Capitol Hill. “You do this because you know how important relationships are with your legislators and with your regulatory officials.”

(ARLINGTON, VA) — Jo Ann Emerson, CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), today drew attention to the important role access to all fuels plays in the reliability and affordability of electricity in America.

“We must be deliberate and purposeful with our energy policy to avoid depriving cost-conscious American families and businesses the affordable, reliable energy they count on as a basic component of everyday life. The competitiveness of the U.S. economy depends upon options when it comes to energy and the regional, economic and demographic differences demand flexibility and freedom when deciding which fuels will keep us moving forward.

“As not-for-profit organizations that serve members in 47 states, electric cooperatives recognize the necessity of a diverse fuel mix. And by leading the implementation of efficiency technologies and renewable fuels, especially in rural areas, we’re well aware that getting to a point where innovation is possible requires as strong a foundation as possible.”

The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association is the national service organization that represents the nation’s more than 900 private, not-for-profit, consumer-owned electric cooperatives, which provide service to 42 million people in 47 states.